Teens Targeted By New Licensing Laws

By Nancy K. Crevier

Becoming a licensed teen driver in Connecticut is presently a process involving several steps: including obtaining a 180-day learner’s permit, the completion of a safe driving course including drug and alcohol issues, and passenger transportation restrictions. Beginning October 1, new amendments to the Connecticut graduated licensing laws will go into effect, further restricting driving privileges for 16- and 17-year-old drivers.

Graduated driver licensing is a system through which young drivers gradually obtain increased privileges as their maturity and driving skills develop. Three stages make up a graduate system.

A supervised learning period is the first step, followed by a license limiting driving in high-risk situations, and finally a full-privilege license is granted upon completion of the first two phases.

Connecticut has required new drivers possessing a learner’s permit to pass certain permit requirements since 1997, and lawmakers have generated further graduated licensing laws in response to data that shows crash rates for beginning drivers, particularly 16-year-olds, are substantially higher than that of the rest of the population. Several factors contribute to increased fatal accidents among young drivers, according to an Insurance Institute For Highway Safety (IIHS) report posted at www.iihs.org: driving inexperience, immaturity, and a tendency to overestimate physical and driving abilities and to underestimate road hazards. By slowly introducing beginning drivers to various driving situations over an extended period, Connecticut lawmakers hope to see a marked decrease in car crashes among new drivers.

One of the obstacles beginning drivers must navigate under the new law is the completion of 20 hours of behind-the-wheel instruction. Until October 1, once a 16- or 17-year-old driver had obtained their learner’s permit, only eight hours of on-the-road training was mandated.

While he is still awaiting final directive from the Department of Motor Vehicles, Gary Knepler of Knepler’s Driving School in Monroe believes that area driving schools will still include the eight hours of behind-the-wheel in the cost of a course, but that the remaining 12 hours may be split up in a variety of ways. “Students can do the extra 12 hours with the driving school, or [all 12 hours] with their parents,” he says. Or they can do some of the additional hours at the school and just a few with the parents. Knepler Driving School is well-equipped to accommodate the extra hours.”

Whichever plan they choose, parents must sign off on any of the 12 additional hours they choose to complete with their student driver, which assumes accountability that could be difficult to verify.

Barry Thayer of the Thayer School of Driving in Danbury feels that most of the parents will be honest, but like Mr Knepler, he is waiting for forms from DMV that will explain exactly how the parent-supervised driving hours will be documented.

Although the option of purchasing more driving hours from the school will be available, Mr Thayer suspects most parents will opt to teach their children on their own.

Grace Federman is one Newtown parent who also believes that many parents will take on the added driving hours themselves and thinks that meeting the extra hours is going to be a fairly easy requirement for parents. Her 16-year-old daughter, Erica, has had her learner’s permit since August. As often as possible, Mrs Federman gives Erica the chance to practice her new skills.

“I think they [beginning drivers] should have at least 20 hours. Eight hours is nothing to put them on the road,” Mrs Federman says.

“If they [student drivers] had to take 20 hours with a school, it would be very expensive,” says Mr Thayer. Driver’s education courses in the Danbury area average $300 to $600 dollars, as it is. Having to pay a driving school for 12 more hours could bump up the cost of a class by an additional $700.

Mr Knepler concurs, saying, “To mandate 20 hours with schools would put many schools out of business. It would become prohibitively expensive.”

Both instructors are in favor, however, of the expanded law. Says Mr Knepler, “The law is just reinforcing what parents should be doing anyway.”

“It’s a good thing,” says Mr Thayer. “We want them to practice what we teach.”

Connecticut laws now address the issue of passenger distraction by restricting the number of riders a newly licensed driver can carry. The October 1, more stringent version of the Connecticut graduated licensing law addresses another factor that contributes to motor vehicle fatalities among teenagers: driving at night.

According to the IIHS, 42 percent of teenage motor vehicle deaths during 2003 occurred between 9 pm and 6 am. Preventing unsupervised, beginning drivers from being on the roads late at night can reduce crashes 40 to 60 percent during those hours.

The new Connecticut law states that 16- and 17-year-old drivers are not permitted to drive between midnight and 5 am. Exceptions to this law are religious and school activities that run past midnight or require attendance prior to 5 am, or to drive to and from work. If it is medically necessary, the restriction also does not apply.

Teen Reactions

Some teens are indignant about the changes. Others are indifferent.

Will Jacob is a 17-year-old driver who lives in Newtown. “I probably won’t be affected personally by the new law,” he says. “And it will probably make the roads safer.”

Will, a co-editor of the Newtown High School newspaper, The Hawkeye, has done his own research on the new laws in recent days, and feels that perhaps Connecticut is a little overdue for these revisions, based on the statistics he has read. Most of the teenagers he has spoken with recently are either unaware of the law change or do not feel as though it will have much of an impact.

Lauren Babbidge, also a 17-year-old driver, begs to differ. “I normally get home by midnight, but I don’t think the law is right, especially for 17-year-olds who have had their license for nearly a year. The state shouldn’t be telling the parents what time kids should be home,” she reasons. She goes on to say, “If the parents trust you, you should be able to be home whenever they say.”

In addition to believing that curfews are the realm of parents, not the state, Lauren finds the random time restriction confusing. “It’s because it’s dark that accidents can happen. You’re driving in the dark whether it is 8 pm or 12:30 am. So why make it [the curfew] midnight?”

Since Connecticut labor laws allow many industries to employ 16- and 17-year-olds until midnight during school vacations, when the day does not precede a school day, or if the youth is not attending school, some young people may find themselves on the road past curfew. Will they now find themselves pulled over and forced to explain their situation?

Enforcing the night driving law will be a difficult call, says Newtown Police Chief Michael Kehoe. “Officers will take observations of cars,” he says, but no stepped up enforcements are foreseen unless problems develop. More than likely, it will be another traffic violation that causes a pullover, and “certainly, if there’s an accident [during the restricted hours and the driver is 16 or 17 years old] that’s an easy call,” says the chief. Violation of the new laws will be an infraction as of October 1, and Newtown scofflaws can expect to pay at least $103 in fines.

Driving Distraction

The October 1 law tackles another issue of driving distraction. Connecticut drivers of all ages will need to park their mobile phones when the clock strikes midnight September 30. But 16- and 17-year-old drivers will not even be permitted to use a hands-free device, nor will the use of any mobile electronic device while operating a vehicle be allowed. Only the operation of installed audio equipment and navigational equipment is exempt from this new amendment.

“I don’t really use the cell phone when I drive,” says Will, “but I think cell phone use [while driving] is a bad idea, regardless of your age.”

Pat Babbidge, Lauren’s mother, agrees with Will’s line of thinking. Lauren, she says, is asked to abide by the family rule that forbids driving and phoning, anyway, but the law reinforces it. “That they [young drivers] cannot use mobile phones is great,” says Mrs Babbidge. “It’s difficult for any driver, let alone new drivers [to use a phone and drive]. Anything that helps them keep focused is a good idea.”

Her daughter has other opinions. “I’m on my cell phone for directions,” she says. “If I don’t know where I’m going, I want to be able to call my parents. And I’ve not once heard of anyone my age getting in an accident because they were on their cell phone. But I’ve known more who get in accidents in parking lots, just sitting there.”

“It’s not unreasonable to ask a teen to pull over and make a call,” is Grace Federman’s attitude toward this portion of the graduated licensing law. However, she goes on to say, “I would be less likely to have it [hands-free device restriction] as an age restriction than say, a year after you get your license, whatever your age. It’s more an experience thing than age,” she believes.

That said, she sums up the general sentiment: “But the law’s the law.”